Gun Control Laws Not Likely

Why? Well, most Americans are against gun control laws (via Jazz Shaw)

(Ocala) By 2004, when the assault weapon ban lapsed, congressional Democrats made no serious attempt to pass an extension. President George W. Bush was content to let it fade into history.

Remember, rented Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry, himself an owner of a Chinese variant of an AK-47, which was banned under the assault weapons ban, had some talking points and complaints about the ending of the ban, but never bothered to attempt to submit legislation to reauthorize the ban, despite being a sitting Senator and presidential candidate. And, remember his little foray out for a hunting trip during the campaign with a shotgun, all dressed up in hunting gear.

Public sentiment had swung.

According to a Gallup poll in 1990, 78 percent of those surveyed said laws covering the sale of firearms should be stricter, while 19 percent said they should remain the same or be loosened.

By the fall of 2004 support for tougher laws had dropped to 54 percent. In last year’s sounding, 43 percent said they should be stricter, and 55 percent said they should stay the same or be made more lenient.

Of course, many of those who say gun laws should be stricter (or banned altogether) believe that this should be done to Other People, not themselves. How many liberals in the entertainment and sports industries have guns themselves, or travel with armed guards? How many Democrat voters own guns themselves? How many elected Democrats depend on arming themselves or having armed guards? They want the ability to protect themselves, but aren’t willing to accord the same protections to others. Again, Democrats aren’t necessarily against guns: they’re against YOU having a gun.

Of course, now that many of the unhinged “guns are evil!!!!!!” opinion pieces were trotted out quickly after the Aurora tragedy (most likely too quickly), the focus looks to be shifting to the Evil NRA and their influence. The above cited article mentions them. Here’s a big smear piece by The Politico. Same with CNN. And all over. But, what they all tell us is that gun control legislation finds little support.

The Second Amendment of our Constitution was meant to protect us from harm, but had the Founding Fathers known back then that the proliferation of guns would put us in harm’s way today, I bet you anything they would have put safeguards in place to prevent abuse. The right to defend oneself makes sense but that should not encompass the right to own weapons of mass destruction, or to endanger the welfare of society. The belief that we need to stockpile guns of every kind to protect us from our own government is a sign of deep paranoia and madness. And to the people who think that way, let me ask you this: do you really believe that if the U.S. government decided for some reason to direct all its military might against you , you would stand a chance against them?

First, the only harm it was meant to protect us against was against government, either a foreign one or our own. If the Founding Fathers had foreseen the huge growth in federal government power, they would surely have put even more restrictions on the federal government, perhaps even saying hang it all, let’s just stick with the Articles of Confederation. Most people do not stockpile guns. Most are like me, with just one handgun, or just a couple shotguns or rifles for hunting.

Do you know what endangers the welfare of society? Weak tea liberal laws on crime, which treats criminals with kid gloves rather than imposing severe punishment.

But, hey, since the military is so strong, we should just give up our guns. Do you know who else was really powerful? England, which had a huge and very strong military at the time of the War for Independence. Sanjay is advocating for guns to only be in the hands of The Government, otherwise you’re unpatriotic. The American People say otherwise. But, you liberals go ahead and push for taking guns out of private hands, and see how far that gets you during the elections.